Cricket Player Manager
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 99

Thread: HyperExtension and Chucking

  1. #1
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230

    HyperExtension and Chucking

    Watching a video of Michael Holding trying to explain Hyperextension in Shoaib Akhtar's bowling (after Greg Chappell raised it in Pak). Holding says that there are other bowlers who have same hyperextension as well but they dont bend their arms as much as Shoaib does and he picks Indian bowler RP Singh who also has hyperextension as well.

    In the clips he shows the hyperextension in RP Singh's arm and compares it to Shoaib's and then shows their side-on bowling actions and then the front-on action. From the side on the hyperextension is clearly visible in both the bowlers, but when you see it front on, RP Singh's action looks perfect, but in Shoaib's action there is a very visible bend. The clip ends there and Holding stops short of giving his verdict.

    I am not the expert here either on bowling or on Biomechanics, I was just wondering how can one guy bowl with straight arm(atleast when you look at it from front) and the other can not ?

    PS :- I wish I could post the video here but the forum rules dont really allow us to do si, but I can say this that it was shown during India's recent tour of Pakistan, after the end of the 4th day play.

  2. #2
    International Debutant dinu23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Colombo,Sri Lanka
    Posts
    2,199
    can u upload the clip to some site? i'd love see it.

  3. #3
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Quote Originally Posted by dinu23
    can u upload the clip to some site? i'd love see it.
    Okay goto Youtube.com and search for 'Shoaib' - It will come up as 'Michael Holding on Shoaib Akhtar's Hyperextension' or 'Shoaib Akhtar & RP Singh Arm Issue'.

    PS :- I hope I am not violating any forum rule, If I am then Mods/admins, please feel free to delete this post.

  4. #4
    U19 Debutant RolledOver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    311
    there might be different degrees of hyperextension, some might have less and others might have more!
    SSS...the king of pace and sledging


  5. #5
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,868
    Quote Originally Posted by RolledOver
    there might be different degrees of hyperextension, some might have less and others might have more!
    Yeah, I'm sure there would be. It's an interesting video there, Sanz. I must admit to having no real idea as to what hyperextension was, so I found it quite helpful in understanding it all.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

  6. #6
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    I myself had no idea, after I saw that I realized that my brother has that type of hyperextension ( Good news is the doesn't play cricket ).

    Also when we look from side-on, IMO RP Singh's Hyperextension is more visible than Shoaib's but the fin the front-on action, Shoaib's elbow bend is really ugly.

  7. #7
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    576

    Icon8

    Its high time ICC should ban all chuckers, Jagmohan is also not in office so noone will stand for those illegeal bowlers!

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianByHeart
    Its high time ICC should ban all chuckers, Jagmohan is also not in office so noone will stand for those illegeal bowlers!
    Please, If you cant post anything positive in this thread, Stay away. I dont want this to be another one of your Pakistan bashing threads. Can someone please check the IP of this hatemonger and Keep him out of this forum for good.

    I wish I had the powers to delete posts in threads created by me.

  9. #9
    International Coach GotSpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Stranger leering through a pair of binoculars
    Posts
    13,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanz
    Please, If you cant post anything positive in this thread, Stay away. I dont want this to be another one of your Pakistan bashing threads. Can someone please check the IP of this hatemonger and Keep him out of this forum for good.

    I wish I had the powers to delete posts in threads created by me.
    Murali chucks ban him..

    On a more serious note, interesting video!
    Mark Waugh
    "He's [Michael Clarke] on Twitter saying sorry for not walking? Mate if he did that in our side there'd be hell to play. AB would chuck his Twitter box off the balcony or whatever it is. Sorry for not walking? Jesus Christ man."
    Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it into a fruit salad
    RIP Craigos

  10. #10
    U19 Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    576
    Please maintain your sanity over here, and stop trying to act like a detective and spying for IP's

    I have expressed my opinion in a very mild manner, i can quote ppl like Bedi,Veingsarkar and Peter Roebuck that had very harsh things to say about chuckers.Everyone has the right to express his opinion.

  11. #11
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    As far as I'm concerned, hyperextension and chucking are two completely different things...given that (from what I understand) hyperextension is an involuntary bending of the elbow past where it would be considered straight when placed under stress (like a bowling action), whereas an illegal action, or 'chucking', has always been the inward bending of the elbow and subsequent straightening during delivery as far as I see it. This is an action that can be remedied and, in most cases, is the result of poor technique and a voluntary movement.

    I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think hyperextension was supposed to be taken into account when the whole 'every bowler throws' thing surfaced - I'm very dubious re: that accusation.

    (bit of changing re: the grammar in that last line - it sucked!)
    Last edited by Son Of Coco; 26-03-2006 at 08:56 PM.
    "What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)

    R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best

    R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi

    Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath

    "How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.

  12. #12
    International Debutant dinu23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Colombo,Sri Lanka
    Posts
    2,199
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco
    As far as I'm concerned, hyperextension and chucking are two completely different things...given that (from what I understand) hyperextension is an involuntary bending of the elbow past where it would be considered straight when placed under stress (like a bowling action), whereas an illegal action, or 'chucking', has always been the inward bending of the elbow and subsequent straightening during delivery from what I understand of things. This is an action that can be remedied and, in most cases, is the result of poor technique and a voluntary movement.

    I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think hyperextension was supposed to be taken into account when the whole 'every bowler throws' thing surfaced, but I'm very dubious.
    agreed

  13. #13
    Hall of Fame Member Sanz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    16,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco
    whereas an illegal action, or 'chucking', has always been the inward bending of the elbow and subsequent straightening during delivery as far as I see it. This is an action that can be remedied and, in most cases, is the result of poor technique and a voluntary movement.
    And I think Shabir Ahmad does that quite often.

  14. #14
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco
    As far as I'm concerned, hyperextension and chucking are two completely different things...given that (from what I understand) hyperextension is an involuntary bending of the elbow past where it would be considered straight when placed under stress (like a bowling action), whereas an illegal action, or 'chucking', has always been the inward bending of the elbow and subsequent straightening during delivery as far as I see it. This is an action that can be remedied and, in most cases, is the result of poor technique and a voluntary movement.
    This, for me, sums it up best.
    You cannot stop hyper-extension. I'm not completely sure, but if I get it correctly a double-jointed joint can only be extended fully (beyond 180degrees) with external force. The joint mechanism can take it only to 180degrees as in a normal joint. As such, the arm does change sinuosity during bowling, but it goes from, say, 178degrees to 192degrees (the latter angle which is beyond a normal elbow). The arm of a chucker would, for instance, go from 152degrees to 176degrees (hypothetical figures).
    I see nothing wrong with a bowler who has a double-jointed elbow bowling in cricket, and nor do most people. Some, of course, don't accept optical-illusions, and people like Shoaib and Kirtley (had never seen Rutra Pratap Singh before yesterday, and confess I noticed nothing yet) do look bad, but it's merely illusion.
    I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think hyperextension was supposed to be taken into account when the whole 'every bowler throws' thing surfaced - I'm very dubious re: that accusation.
    No, it didn't come into that: the point of that was that the ideals - that most bowlers had bowling-actions where the elbow flexation was 0 degrees - were false, and most bowling-actions involved 10 degrees flexation or something around about (there was, obviously, quite a bit of variation - which is not really surprising given how many different bowlers there are).
    Then the ludicrousy of stating that 14 degrees was somehow massively different from 16 degrees, while there was no difference between 12 and 14, came in.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  15. #15
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    This, for me, sums it up best.
    You cannot stop hyper-extension. I'm not completely sure, but if I get it correctly a double-jointed joint can only be extended fully (beyond 180degrees) with external force. The joint mechanism can take it only to 180degrees as in a normal joint. As such, the arm does change sinuosity during bowling, but it goes from, say, 178degrees to 192degrees (the latter angle which is beyond a normal elbow). The arm of a chucker would, for instance, go from 152degrees to 176degrees (hypothetical figures).
    I see nothing wrong with a bowler who has a double-jointed elbow bowling in cricket, and nor do most people. Some, of course, don't accept optical-illusions, and people like Shoaib and Kirtley (had never seen Rutra Pratap Singh before yesterday, and confess I noticed nothing yet) do look bad, but it's merely illusion.

    No, it didn't come into that: the point of that was that the ideals - that most bowlers had bowling-actions where the elbow flexation was 0 degrees - were false, and most bowling-actions involved 10 degrees flexation or something around about (there was, obviously, quite a bit of variation - which is not really surprising given how many different bowlers there are).
    Then the ludicrousy of stating that 14 degrees was somehow massively different from 16 degrees, while there was no difference between 12 and 14, came in.
    Yeah, I think that's the case too as far as hyperextension goes - you need stress placed on the joint for it to extend past its normal threshhold. From what I understand of it, it's possible for every bowler's elbow to extend past this threshhold under the stress of bowling, not just double-jointed elbows (I'm not sure if that's what you were saying or not!?). As far as I'm concerned, rules that call someone whose arm hyperextends from any degree past its normal threshold a 'chucker' are farcical, as it's an involuntary movement...a player whose arm bends and straightens on the other hand should have nearly no margin of error as it's a voluntary or learnt movement and is able to be corrected. The only way you can stop a bowler's arm from hyperextending is to strap a steel rod to it. A bowler who starts and stays bent (his arm that is) is, as we all know, ok.

    If the ICC were looking at elbow 'flexation' though, were they looking for any flex or an action that would actually indicate some sort of throw? Every bowler does not throw if you look at the definition of a throw as I believe it to be...every bowler undoubtedly has a level of flex associated with hyperextension though. I'm far from an expert on this (I'd reside at the other end of the spectrum actually!) so these are questions, definately not statements.

    I understand what you're saying in reference to the difference in degrees, and I assume it was decided that some sort of limit needed to be established...has anything the ICC has attempted to do with throwing seemed sensible though?

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •